... Therearethreeintegralpartsin the MBNQA performance excellenceframework:(1) the leadershiptriad,(2) the resultstriad, and (3)measurement,analysis, and knowledge 15 management. The leadershiptriadcomprises the leadership(Category1), strategic planning(Category2), and customer and marketfocus(Category3). The leadership, strategic planning, and customer and marketfocusdimensionsareplacedtogetherin the leadershiptriadtorecognizetheircollectiveimportance(Prybutoketal.,2008). The leadershiptriademphasizes the importanceofaleadershipfocuson strategy and customers, and impliesthatseniorleadersmustsetorganization’sdirection and developnewbusinessopportunities. The resultstriadconsistsofworkforcefocus(Category5),process management (Category6), and results(Category7). The focusof the resultstriadison the employees and keyprocessesof the organizationcriticaltoimplement the worksystemthatyieldsresults.Measurement,analysis, and knowledge management (Category4)provides the foundationforanalyzing the performance management systemthatiscriticalforimproving performance, competitiveness, and strategic advantage(NIST2008). The foundationof the MBNQAframeworkisthat the Criteriabuildon the CoreValues and Conceptswhichareembeddedinsystematicprocessesyielding performance results”(NIST,2008,p.49).Figure2portrays the generalideabehind the 2008MBNQAframework.Thisdiagramshows the relationship between (1) the criteria’scorevalues and concepts and the criteriaitems and (2) the criteriaprocesscategories and the criteriaresults.NIST(2008)positsthattherearemanypossiblespecificrelationships between the corevaluesorconcepts, the criteriaprocesscategories, and the criteriaresults.NIST(2008)alsopositsthat the CoreValuesorConceptsareshownincloseproximityto the specificCriteriaProcessCategorieswith the mostdirect relationship , and that“eachCriteriaResultsItemisshownincloseproximityto the ProcessCategorytowhichitismostcloselytied”(NIST,2008,p.27).Forinstance,process16effectivenessresultsitemhas the mostdirect relationship with the process management category, and isthusincloseproximitytoit.Processeffectivenessoutcomesalsoprovidekeyinformationforanalysis,review and improvementoforganizational performance, and serveas the operationalbasisforproduct and serviceoutcomes,customer‐focusedoutcomes, and financial and marketoutcomes(NIST,2008).Figure2:MBNQAcorevalues and concepts,criteria, and outcomes(NIST,2008,p.49) ... The MBNQAframeworkisoneof the mostinfluentialframeworksformeasuringorganizational performance (Evans&Jack,2003).Itenjoyswidespreadacceptanceatlocal,national, and internationallevels(Kochan,1992;Ettorre,1996;Pannirselvametal.,1998;Dow,Samson,&Ford,1999;Samson&Terziovski,1999).Forinstance,Pannirselvametal.(1998)mirrored the BaldrigecriteriainArizonaGovernor’sQualityAward(AGQA)model.Dowetal.17(1999), and Samson and Terziovski(1999)used the Baldrigeframeworktostudy the qualityofmanufacturingfirmsinAustralia and NewZealand.Variousstudieshaveused,extended and testedthisframeworkinseveralindustriesincludingmanufacturing(Handfield&Ghosh,1995;Dowetal.,1999;Samson&Terziovski,1999;Wilson&Collier,2000;Flynn&Saladin,2001;Prajogo,2005),service(Prajogo,2005),healthcare(Prybutok&Spink,1999;Meyer&Collier,2001),government(Pannirselvametal.,1998;Pannirselvam&Ferguson,2001;Prybutoketal.,2008), and highereducation(Winn&Cameron,1998).Numerousstudieshaveinvestigated the linkagesimpliedin the MalcolmBaldrigeNationalQualityAwardframework.Mostofthesestudiesused the MBNQAframeworksreleasedpriorto2000(Prybutoketal.,2008).Therearetwosalientfeaturesofthesestudies.First, the MBNQAframeworks(differentversionsof the MBNQAframework)weretestedat the categorylevelonly.Second, the MBNQAframeworksspecifieddirectionofcausefromonedirectionbyusingunidirectionalarrowsbasedon the generalpropositionthatleadershipdrives the systemthatcreatesresults(e.g.,Dowetal.,1999;Prybutok&Spink,1999;Samson&Terziovski,1999;Wilson&Collier,2000;Meyer&Collier,2001).Therefore,theywererepresentedasrecursivemodels(Byrne,1998).Forinstance,Wilson and Collier(2000)tested the relationshipsin1995MBNQAframework and portrayed the relationshipsinarecursivecausalmodel.Theypositedthat the Baldrigequalityexpertsdidnotfollowtheirgeneraltheoryindefining the specific performance relationships between the criteriacategories.Wilson and Collieralsoarguedthat the Baldrigequalityexpertsdefaultedto the premisethateverythingisrelatedtoeverythingelsebecausetheyhadnoideahowthesespecific performance relationships and directionsofcausationshouldbedefined.18 The Baldrigeframeworkhasundergonesignificantchangessince1995 and sinceitsinceptionin1987. The 2008Baldrigecriteriarepresent the mostrecent and highlyenhancedframework.Significantchangesarereflectedin the criteriacategories, the underlyingrelationships, and the GlossaryofKeyTerms,amongothers.Forexample,while the 1995Baldrigesystemconsistedoffourcriteriacategories–process management, humanresourcedevelopment and management, strategic planning, and information and analysis, the 2008Baldrigesystem(Figure2)consistsofsixcriteriacategories–(1)leadership,(2) strategic planning,(3)customer and marketfocus,(4)measurement,analysis, and knowledge management, (5)workforcefocus, and (6)process management. Like the 1995 and otherBaldrigeframeworks, the 2008Baldrigeframeworkhasusedtwo‐headedarrowsamong the Baldrigesystemcriteriacategories(Categories1–6)(Figure1).ThisisinlinewithNIST’sunderlyingpropositionthat the Baldrigesystemcategoriesarereciprocallyrelated–bothdirectly and indirectly.Therefore, the Baldrigesystemrepresentsanon‐recursivecausalmodel(Byrne,1998).However, the 2008Baldrigesystemisconnectedto performance results(Category7)withone‐directionalarrowspointingto the latter.Thisimpliesthat the Baldrigequalityexpertsdidnotdefaultto the premisethateverythingisrelatedtoeverythingelsebutratherposited the relationshipsassuch.Thisalsoimpliesthatthereisarecursivecausal relationship between the Baldrigesystem and the performance results. The BPMFramework The acronymBPMinthisstudystandsforbusiness performance management, nottobeconfusedwith the termbusinessprocess management. Synonymouswith the conceptofBPMare the conceptsofcorporate performance management (CPM) and enterprise performance 19 ... substantiverevisionsto the Criteriafor2008.(NIST,2008,p.27) The mostsignificantchangesin the 2008bookletinclude the additionof the term Strategic Advantages”to the GlossaryofKeyTerms, and twonewdiagrams–oneofwhichillustrates the roleofcorevalues and conceptsinunderpinning the criteria, and the othershowsmaturitylevelsinorganizationallearning(NIST,2008).Therefore, the 2007framework and the 2008frameworkcanbeusedinterchangeably. The relationshipsin the proposedconceptuallyenhanced2007/2008frameworkarecurrentlynotvalidatedin the academicliterature.Validating the 2007/2008frameworkwillsupport the framework’scurrentformaswellasprovidemanagerswithmeaningfulinformationthattheycanuseindecidingwheretheyshouldfocustheireffortsinachieving performance excellence.Therefore, the firstobjectiveofthisstudyistovalidate the underlyingrelationshipspresentedin the 2007/2008framework. The MBNQAframeworkenjoyswidespreadacceptanceatlocal,national, and internationallevels(Kochan,1992;Ettorre,1996;Pannirselvam,Siferd,&Ruch,1998).Variousstudieshaveused,extended and testedthisframeworkinseveralindustries,suchashealth3care(Prybutok&Spink,1999;Meyer&Collier,2001),governmentorganizations(Pannirselvametal.,1998;Pannirselvam&Ferguson,2001), and highereducation(Winn&Cameron,1998).However,thesestudiestested the frameworkat the categorylevel.Thereisapaucityofevidencetesting the MBNQAframeworkat the dimensionlevel.Adimensionlevelanalysiswillprovideacademicians and managerswithbetterinsightregardinghoweachiteminacategoryisrelatedtospecificitemsinothercategories(Pannirselvam&Ferguson,2001).Thatis,dimensionlevelanalysisisnecessarytobetterunderstandhowvariousquality management aspectsaffecteachother and impactbusiness performance (Evans,1997).Therefore, the secondobjectiveofthisstudyistoexplore the MBNQAframeworkat the dimensionlevel, and develop and testconstructsmeasuredatthatlevelinacausalmodel. The BPMframeworkembodiesaclosed‐loop.Cokins(2007)positsthatbusiness performance management existeddecadesago and thatorganizationsweredoing performance management longbeforeitwaslabeledsuchin1990sbyinformationtechnologyresearchfirms and softwarevendors.Thereislittleornoresearchinacademiaonbusiness performance management. SeveralpractitionerBPMframeworksexistbuttheseareindustryspecific and varyfromindustrytoindustry(Eckerson,2004;Cokins,2007).However,allsuchframeworkshavecommonconstructs–develop strategy; define,measure and manage performance against strategic goal;continuouslyadjust and refine strategy; and optimize the strategic execution.Therefore, the thirdobjectiveofthisworkistovalidate and createacommongeneralframeworkfor the business performance management byintegrating the practitionerliteraturewithbasictheoryincludingexistingMBNQAtheory.4 The 2008criteriaplacesignificantimportanceoncompetitiveadvantages, strategic advantages,corecompetencies, and innovation. The Baldrigecriteriaaskthought‐provoking,criticalquestionsthatemphasizeanorganizationalinfrastructurethatisessentialtomaintain and improvecompetitiveadvantage and bringaboutinnovation.Oneimpedimenttoachievingimprovedorganizationeffectiveness and competitivenessis the hugegap between strategy and execution(Eckerson,2004).Eckerson(2004)suggeststhatbusiness performance management (BPM)bridges the gap between strategy and execution.EckersonalsopositsthatBPMhelpsorganizationsexploitmarketopportunitiesastheyarise, and makeorganizationsmoreeffective, and morecompetitive.Therefore, the finalobjectiveofthisstudyistointegrate the business performance management framework and the MBNQAframeworkintoanewframework(BPM‐MBNQAframework)thatcanguideorganizationsintheirjourneytowardachieving and sustainingcompetitive and strategic advantages.Insummary, the objectivesareasfollows:1....